BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 2002-01 > 1010498506

From: "Kathy Heidel" <>
Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] Motion 02-01 ByLaws Committee Formation
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 08:01:46 -0600

Teresa you were on the Bylaws Formation SC. Did you not have input on that
committee and did you approve of the report prior to this motion? Why the
sudden change? I believe that there will be plenty of time to discuss this
motion after we receive it as such.You will have every opportunity to
discuss this, I am sure of that. I see no reason to tie up every motion that
comes up into 2 lengthily discussions, 1 is enough, I believe. We will never
get anything accomplished if we continue in this mode. Prior to my calling
the vote, not one email came in concerning this topic, what were we waiting

----- Original Message -----
From: "merope" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 5:07 AM
Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] Motion 02-01 ByLaws Committee Formation

> At 09:40 PM 1/7/02 -0600, Kathy Heidel wrote:
> >Holly,
> >I would like to Call the Question on Motion 02-01 "Bylaws Committee
> >Formation" as there appears to be no debate on this.
> >Kathy
> Actually, I believe this motion requires much discussion.
> After receiving comments from constituents and given the increasingly
> amount left to the committee to do its work prior to the "drop dead" date
> built into the motion, I can no longer support this motion in its current
> -Teresa
> >"Speak softly and carry a big stick"
> >FDR

This thread: